I'm re-learning the slide show business after a 6 year absence. The wide range of styles and transitions in PSG5 are impressive. But as I go through them I find some very attractive to me and some very un-attractive. I'm sure that's a common reaction.

So I went to Google and searched for "good examples", "best practices", and a bunch of other search attempts. I came up empty, which surprises me. If you do the same for web design, you get led to a large quantity of information, much of which consists of in-depth research on how certain styles of web design are more effective than others - effective in leading the audience to where you want them to go and maximizing their comprehension and retention of your message.

Does anybody know if such information exists for photo slideshows?

Or, can you point me to sites that give examples of "good" slideshows, hopefully with an analysis of why the site author thinks they are good?

When I first dabbled with PSG back in 2006, the Photodex website had a showcase of slideshows they had picked as excellent examples. I still have a bookmark to a guy named Mark Ridout. That showcase appears to be gone now, with Photodex telling us to just dump our shows to Youtube to share. So now the good stuff is lost in the sea of Youtube junk.

Anybody know of a site that picks slideshows on Youtube that are rated as "good", not necessairly for their content but for their presentation method (styles, transitions)?

There are threads that describe what makes a good show in archives. Basically, tell a good story have a beginning middle and end and don't overdo the effects. Use the effects to compliment the images, not compete with them for the attention of the viewer eyes.

That said, opinions of how good a show is will vary from person to person, (is subjective) so it's hard to point to any specific show. A large amount of views and comments on a show thread might help you find some shows worth watching in the sample show area but you may have to go a ways back to find some of the best ones.

Though you will only find shows made with older versions of Proshow in "Challenges" section, look for Golden Oldies in the thread titles if you'd like to see some of the veteran members' favorite shows.

Thanks to all for the leads. There is plenty there for me to browse to pick up ideas.

The challenge of my current projects is to create shows that will be appealing to people who likely have very different tastes from my own.

For example, I saw a show where images came spinning and zooming in at high speed, then fractured into a hundred pieces to reveal the next image, which also did a dance of a thousand steps. It was disturbing and made me dizzy.

But I'm creating some shows of child portraits, to appeal to their 20 something parents. Maybe the parents like that sort of frenetic activity.

I think there are a few different ways people look at the shows they are creating. Some focus on presenting the photos for the viewers to really appreciate. Some focus on creating the most riveting presentation and showing off what can be done with the program. There are also those who are mainly interested in displaying their best photography skills. My main focus these days is recording our family's times for the future, since we hardly ever have our images printed anymore. So, I will put some photos into a show, even if they aren't the best quality, because they will capture a time and bring back a vivid memory of an event or a person. There is no 100% right way. The purpose of the show and the indended audience is what should determine the style.Have fun.

There's no one right way to create a show, no formula that can or even should be followed. No creative art can abide what would result: boring uniformity. It's up to each individual to find his or her own sense of design. Even the supposed no-no's occasionally show up perfectly in a perfect place.

There are rules in the army; there are no rules in art unless you make your own. I guess that's what everyone has said in one way or another.

BUT, there are some general rules to follow (after you get used to them, you can figure out exactly when and where to break them).

Try to keep your shows to 10 minutes, give or take a few. That's because the typical attention span for these shows starts to wander after that.

Captions: use sparingly. Most shows don't need them. Use them (typically) for your intro's and outros as appropriate and for announcing that you're about to enter a new section.

Effects. Use sparingly. Typically you'll want to use only a few. If you have too many, the viewer is going to be concentrating on what effect is coming next and may miss what you really want them to see. The can be a good way to reset the attention span to keep the interest up ... but, you don't want to rely on them as your main vehicle for transitioning between slides. To much of a good thing is not good.

Keep a theme for each section of your show . . . try not to change it unless there's a compelling reason. You don't want to fatigue your viewers any quicker than you have to. Keep the contrast from being to extreme. An all black background for every slide from start to finish is going to make the eyes tired sooner than if you had a less drastic background difference (color coordinate if you can). The same goes for an all white background.

Change themes between sections if you need to.

Make your show tempo match that of the music. A fast paced tempo of slide/image changes with a slow paced tempo tune is NOT going to go over well. Also, time your show's images to the beat (on or off of it) in the tune. A show that has images that seem to have no correlation to the music gets old pretty darned quick. Anyone can attach music to a show and call it a slideshow ... but the viewers are going to struggle to get though it and they'll NEVER want to see it again (if they make it all the way to the end...).

Those are some top level, off the cuff suggestions. You can download more complete information on the page located in the link below. Look for the SLIDESHOW TIPS links on the following page (lower right):